MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251142629 · doi:10.4324/9780429328138

China’s Role in the Arctic

2020· book· en· W4251142629 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nong Hong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaThe arcticArcticGeographyPolitical scienceOceanographyGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This book explores the growing interests of China in the Arctic and examines the nature of its interests and motivations in maintaining its involvement and presence in the region. The new geopolitical landscape of the Arctic today is a significant departure from the great power politics that existed in the region during the Cold War era. Apart from traditional Arctic states, more and more international organizations and non-Arctic states are showing an increased interest in this region, not least China. Many have attempted to interpret China’s intention in moving to the high north and this book aims to add to the existing literature from three approaches: China’s participation in the international institutions, China’s relationships with the Arctic stakeholders and China’s sectoral engagement in the Arctic. In taking a three-dimensional approach to the analysis, the author builds a comprehensive picture of China’s interests and activities in the Arctic, not only from the perspective of China but also from the viewpoint of other Arctic states (Russia, Canada, the U.S., Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Iceland). One of the first books in English to cover the subject since the release of China’s Arctic policy white paper in January 2018, this analysis will be of interest to academics, students of Arctic studies, maritime law and international law, as well as policy makers in Arctic and non-Arctic states.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207